Heaven's eternity or eternal earthly wealth?

[harvey19]

I agree but this doesn't conflict with anything I said, at all.

What makes you think it does?

 

It goes without saying that before you are decided, you are undecided. How does this have any effect on the 3 points I listed?

 

My final post on this thread as myself and others have tried to explain our viewpoint to you.

In your example above if one is not a Believes or an Unbeliever and doesn't have a preference either way they are Undecided and this condition may continue all their life.

It is really simple, I respectfully consider that you are complicating matters.

[Ryedo40]

Harvey, if you have no awareness of the actual existence of something, you will have an absence of belief in its existence.

 

If you are undecided on the claims of the existence of something, you will still have an absence of belief in its actual existence.

 

If you believe the claims that something exists, you will have the belief that something exists.

[RootsBooster]

My final post on this thread as myself and others have tried to explain our viewpoint to you.

In your example above if one is not a Believes or an Unbeliever and doesn't have a preference either way they are Undecided and this condition may continue all their life.

It is really simple, I respectfully consider that you are complicating matters.

 

As explained before, I'm simplifying matters.

I'm not sure what the word 'unbeliever' means exactly to you but according to the OED it means "Someone who has no religious beliefs, or who does not follow a particular religion."

You disagree that the 3 points/statements I made are true yet you are unable to explain why. So far you haven't said anything contrary to them, other than you disagree with them.

 

To use mjw47's example earlier in the thread, if a customer in a restaurant is undecided about what meal they want, they will have no meal until they are decided. Now replace the word 'meal' with 'belief'.

 

---------- Post added 29-01-2015 at 13:16 ----------

 

Harvey, if you have no awareness of the actual existence of something, you will have an absence of belief in its existence.

 

If you are undecided on the claims of the existence of something, you will still have an absence of belief in its actual existence.

 

If you believe the claims that something exists, you will have the belief that something exists.

 

I find that the only people who have an issue with accepting this are

 

1. Some theists who seem to think that if they acknowledge this, it means there are more players on the 'opposite team'

 

2. Some agnostics who like to think that theism/atheism is beneath them and will argue to the bitter end that an agnostic cannot also be a theist or atheist. This, despite the creator of the word acknowledging that he was both an agnostic and an atheist himself.

 

I think it comes down to personal pride in the end.

Edited January 29, 2015 by RootsBooster

[mjw47]

 

---------- Post added 29-01-2015 at 13:16 ----------

 

 

I find that the only people who have an issue with accepting this are

 

1. Some theists who seem to think that if they acknowledge this, it means there are more players on the 'opposite team'

 

2. Some agnostics who like to think that theism/atheism is beneath them and will argue to the bitter end that an agnostic cannot also be a theist or atheist. This, despite the creator of the word acknowledging that he was both an agnostic and an atheist himself.

 

I think it comes down to personal pride in the end.

 

People who imagine that they can guess the reasons for other peoples views and thoughts on matters despite not knowing those people are deluding themselves.

 

Why on earth would anyone think anyone elses view/belief is beneath them?

 

Especially someone who acknowledges that they themselves don't know.

 

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDcQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newworldencyclopedia.org%2Fentry%2FAgnosticism&ei=yzjKVNXZPKOC7gaq24GoBA&usg=AFQjCNGShXnvStu94C3ftDHENuiHbMCRLQ&bvm=bv.84607526,d.ZGU

 

According to the above link I adhere to Strong Agnosticism. Why don't you take a break from your normal attitude that you know better than anyone else what they think and just accept someones word for a change?

 

I have in fact used the comment " I don't know and neither does anyone else " previously. I have no objection to adding Strong, as it is simply an affirmation, as opposed to a bias as the add on that you keep trying to foist on me would be.

 

Why do you continue to do that?

 

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=12&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CGoQ1ScwCw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Farticles%2Flife%2Fthe_spectator%2F2010%2F06%2Fan_agnostic_manifesto.html&ei=XD7KVOmkDqiy7QbNm4CgAQ&usg=AFQjCNGx2ZrE_KiW4deRZfNh4_FMtFjDww&bvm=bv.84607526,d.ZGU

 

I think it comes down to overweening arrogance in the end.

[Ryedo40]

I find that the only people who have an issue with accepting this are

 

1. Some theists who seem to think that if they acknowledge this, it means there are more players on the 'opposite team'

 

2. Some agnostics who like to think that theism/atheism is beneath them and will argue to the bitter end that an agnostic cannot also be a theist or atheist. This, despite the creator of the word acknowledging that he was both an agnostic and an atheist himself.

 

I think it comes down to personal pride in the end.

 

 

I completely agree with you RootsBooster. Of course, some people, perhaps because of that pride - and maybe because they have a superiority complex - there is no reasoning with them. I think that's when it's time to no-longer respond to their posts.

Edited January 29, 2015 by Ryedo40

[mjw47]

I completely agree with you RootsBooster. Of course, some people, perhaps because of that pride - and maybe because they have a superiority complex - there is no reasoning with them. I think that's when it's time to no-longer respond to their posts.

 

Talking of complexes.

 

This one is definitely descriptive of some of the posters on here who are under the impression that they can describe other peoples beliefs better than the people themselves.

 

 

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2Fsophomania&ei=CEjKVNuoFcOV7Aar0IDoCQ&usg=AFQjCNHlbmAde_E_W3ElIMQfQ7HsgFWRsg&bvm=bv.84607526,d.ZGU&cad=rja

[flamingjimmy]

Why on earth would anyone think anyone elses view/belief is beneath them?

I don't know, perhaps we should ask the person who's been abusive and condescending towards everyone who's disagreed with them... oh wait that's you!

[mjw47]

I don't know, perhaps we should ask the person who's been abusive and condescending towards everyone who's disagreed with them... oh wait that's you!

 

The only reason that I have adopted that response is because people are effectively calling me a liar when I have explained my viewpoint.

 

When you keep on explaining to people that your attitude to a certain subject is quite straight forward, and can be perfectly adequately described using a word designed specifically for the purpose, and they keep disagreeing with you then inevitably a certain amount of contempt of their stance is to be expected.

 

Perhaps if some posters treat people with a little respect then they wouldn't get abused, but when they appear incapable of doing so because of an arrogant regard for their own opinion then they invite and get what they get.

[teeny]

The only reason that I have adopted that response is because people are effectively calling me a liar when I have explained my viewpoint.

 

When you keep on explaining to people that your attitude to a certain subject is quite straight forward, and can be perfectly adequately described using a word designed specifically for the purpose, and they keep disagreeing with you then inevitably a certain amount of contempt of their stance is to be expected.

 

Perhaps if some posters treat people with a little respect then they wouldn't get abused, but when they appear incapable of doing so because of an arrogant regard for their own opinion then they invite and get what they get.

 

Most of us on here do respect each others opinions !! but they dont always like the answers so reply in a certain way

[Ryedo40]

I don't know, perhaps we should ask the person who's been abusive and condescending towards everyone who's disagreed with them... oh wait that's you!

 

Exactly. And what people like that do is go into a defensive mode where, because they feel inferior, and because they recognise their position is flawed, they attack others - usually their intelligence - and try to bring them down to the level of inferiority they themselves feel(inturn making themselves feel superior). And they'll even mistake polite and reasonable discussion for arrogance.

 

And MJW continues to prove my point with his previous posts.

Edited January 29, 2015 by Ryedo40